The long term crisis for Sidmouth is all about funding - but at times it descends into ego trips. Leave those aside. Without resolution of a serious funding issue, it may never be the same 'international' festival again. 2005 is to support 2006 and to keep the memories of 2004 alive until 2006, as much as proves possible. Discussing finance is as central to 2005 as it is for 2006 - but different questions need asking if contributors are to produce the best possible festival in the circumstances in which everyone now finds themselves.

Other festivals also suffer from increased costs. Rational discussion of how these should be reduced and/or new sources of finance found is surely crucial to the future. In my (relatively) expert opinion, the AFO discussion of how festivals contribute to local economies is rubbish. I have stated my views and the reasons for them .http://www.seered.co.uk/folk22.htm The AFO report was produced by very well meaning people who
were knowledgeable in their field (the folk scene) but who got out of their depth. I have published my views on the company who undertook the work. I couldn't pluck a guitar if I tried (which I wouldn't) and some people couldn't analyse their way out a paper bag. There have been debates in Sidmouth about these issues for a long time and never from a proper analytical base. Hence there has been little progress.

The funding issue will not go away. The discussion needs to be taken forward. If a few large or small egos get bruised on the way, if some people wish to limit their involvement in the folk scene to making music in smoky pubs then don't try and tell other people with different perspectives and abilities that they can/cannot discuss other topics.

I have no interest in pub sessions (mainly because of the smoke!) and I would never try to tell people how to hold them or what to play or sing. Around 90% of my 'folk' interest is simply in ceilidh dancing. I am not a folk groupie. But I do have an interest in analysis and economics. (PhD in physics and many years working with scientists and economists). One reason I chose to live in Sidmouth was the Festival. My first letter in support of the Festival (stating that it surely helped to promote international understanding) was published in the Sidmouth Herald before I bought my present home. I will try to find a copy.

So is it permitted to discuss a few points central to the future funding of folk festivals - and to the Sidmouth festival in particular (both 2005 and 2006) and without being accused of 'negativity'? Thank you so much.

If people don't like rational discussion - go someplace else. The following is from the BBC thread - I posted it but their board is so inadequate in software terms I doubt many people will see it. I have never seen such a weird system - they tell me it is overloaded and due for replacement. They should just order the mudcat software and have done with it!

From BBC Board: ""Here is a challenge: find anything that is wrong on SeeRed folk pages, prove it to me and I'll change it. I have made changes within minutes when minor errors have been pointed out or when I have reproduced something that someone didn't want exposing more widely than on the muddy cat. I have, for example, argued that local taxpayers should not (perhaps) have to subsidise what is a national festival - the page is folk22.htm. It is akin to expecting residents of Birmingham to pay for the M6, the M5 and the M42 just because they happen to meet there. These are national resources and are funded nationally. Try to fault the arguments instead of just bleating.""

"Discuss" - but only if you want to and can remain polite and rational. If you can't, just ignore the discussion.

Dr Stephen J Wozniak
Sidmouth